Occasionally, during the past eight years of writing this column, I have addressed the remarkably dangerous manner in which Republican Party officials rule the nation when they control one or more of the three branches of the federal government. … Election Day 2008 now provides the only clear remedy for the ills of Republican rule.
The Republican Approach to Government: Authoritarian Rule
Republicans rule, rather than govern, when they are in power, by imposing their authoritarian conservative philosophy on everyone as their answer for everything. This works for them because their interest is in power, and in what it can do for those who think as they do. Ruling, of course, must be distinguished from governing, which is a more nuanced process that entails give-and-take and the kind of compromises that are often necessary to find a consensus and solutions that will best serve the interests of all Americans.
Republicans’ authoritarian rule can also be characterized by its striking incivility and intolerance toward those who do not view the world as Republicans do. Their insufferable attitude is not dangerous in itself, but it is employed to accomplish what they want, which is to take care of themselves and those who work to keep them in power…
The McCain/Palin Ticket Perfectly Fits the Authoritarian Conservative Mold
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Senator John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican candidates, have shown themselves to be unapologetic and archetypical authoritarian conservatives. Indeed, their campaign has warmed the hearts of fellow authoritarians, who applaud them for their negativity, nastiness, and dishonest ploys and only criticize them for not offering more of the same.
The McCain/Palin campaign has assumed a typical authoritarian posture: The candidates provide no true, specific proposals to address America’s needs. Rather, they simply ask voters to "trust us" and suggest that their opponents – Senators Barack Obama and Joe Biden – are not "real Americans" like McCain, Palin, and the voters they are seeking to court…
The Problem with Electing Authoritarian Conservatives
What is wrong with being an authoritarian conservative? Well, if you want to take the country where they do, nothing. "They would march America into a dictatorship and probably feel that things had improved as a result," Altemeyer told me. "The problem is that these authoritarian followers are much more active than the rest of the country. They have the mentality of ‘old-time religion’ on a crusade, and they generously give money, time and effort to the cause…
Frankly, the fact that the pre-election polls are close – after eight years of authoritarian leadership from Bush and Cheney, and given its disastrous results – shows that many Americans either do not realize where a McCain/Palin presidency might take us, or they are happy to go there. Frankly, it scares the hell out of me, for there is only one way to deal with these conservative zealots: Keep them out of power…
If Obama is rejected on November 4th for another authoritarian conservative like McCain, I must ask if Americans are sufficiently intelligent to competently govern themselves. I can understand authoritarian conservatives voting for McCain, for they know no better. It is well-understood that most everyone votes with his or her heart, not his or her head. Polls show that 81 percent of Americans "feel" … that our country is going the wrong way. How could anyone with such thoughts and feelings vote for more authoritarian conservatism, which has done so much to take the nation in the wrong direction?
I agree with everything he says in this article except for one thing – one piece of his his last paragraph. Emotionally, he is certainly stating what I feel, "If Obama is rejected on November 4th for another authoritarian conservative like McCain, I must ask if Americans are sufficiently intelligent to competently govern themselves." I cannot imagine the country doing what it did in 2004 and reelecting this kind of government to Washington. For that matter, I couldn’t believe it in 1972 after four years of Nixon nor could I believe it in 1984 or 1988 after Reagan’s first and second terms.
But I question his analysis of, "why?" As he says, people vote their feelings. So I don’t think it’s lack of intelligence that accounts for people voting for what I personally consider an un-American Party to run this country repeatedly. I think it has to do with two emotions. The first is fear – specifically xenophobia. The American experiment involves being the "great melting pot." That is against the human tendency to congregate in groups that are homogeneous and fight with other homogeneous groups. It’s not ignorance that drives the voters, nor lack of intelligence, it’s fear. Let’s gather in homogeneous tribes and keep out those "others." The whole Republican strategy is to activate the fear of the largest groups – white, christian, fundamentalist, hawk, businessmen, etc. Fighting this tendency is the great American challenge.
The second emotion is related to the first, power and it’s the one Dean mentions. It’s not exactly an emotion. It’s more the response to another emotion, power being the solution to fear. After World War II, we were full of it – a Superpower. It was the watchword of Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and the paranoid Neoconservatives. McCain preaches it like a fire-breathing country preacher. In fact, fear and power as a solution are the universal forces that drive paranoia of any kind – individuals, groups, countries. When I was in practice, I had a picture of a fierce Indian Warrior on my wall. When people asked me why, I answered truthfully, "It’s there to remind me that he doesn’t look it, but he is very afraid. It’s the face of fear."
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.